Jump to content

andydufresne

Members
  • Content Count

    48
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

andydufresne last won the day on November 14

andydufresne had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

24 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

More information about you

  • How did you hear about Umpire-Empire?
    Other (explain below)

Recent Profile Visitors

1,848 profile views
  1. I was all set to weigh in with a perspective that hasn't been represented in this thread. But then I realized anyone who had to look up "cis-gendered" to find out what it meant is probably so out of touch with today's culture that nobody cares what he thinks about this topic.
  2. I agree with everything else you said, but not with the part I quoted above. I see that happen quite often: R1 only and not stealing, nobody on base, bases loaded.....I see it a lot. What I'm seeing a lot of now that I never saw until about five years ago is catchers stepping not directly toward second base when throwing, but into the batter's box instead. You can tell it's being taught because you're right--they aren't stupid, and they know they will get a BI call nearly every time even if they are the one to initiate the contact.
  3. I don't think he needs to lose his job any more than an umpire who errs needs to lose his job. What he needs to do is stop pontificating about things (like, e.g., RLI) he doesn't understand. I get where a lot of these guys are coming from. I've weighed in at length on how far over the edge I think the NCAA has gone in the interps of BI and FPSR. What I've never (I hope) done is have my disdain for the rule cause me to criticize the guy who properly applies and enforces it. "I hate the rule" is a hundred and ten degrees from "That's a HORRIBLE call. He sucks!"
  4. Good God, the former players are doubling, tripling and quadrupling down on stupid on the post game show.
  5. Can't they train Joe Buck to shut up when he doesn't know what he's talking about? He's like Ken Harrelson, but with manners.
  6. That's not how I think umpires should be evaluated on their plate jobs. When I work, generally 75-80% of pitches in a game can be called correctly by my dead grandmother--swings and misses, foul balls, cock shots, anything out of the zone in any direction by 4" or more. You earn your money on calling about 50 pitches. Miss five and you get a 45/50 or 90%, not 215/220 or 97.8%, from me. That's a B, not an A. In the two ABs that dumbdumb posted the charts for, there are twelve pitches, and seven of them are "dead grandmother" pitches. He was three of five, or 60%, on the others and the two misses were on payoff pitches. That's going to get peoples' attention, particularly when it occurs on consecutive batters. Measured as part of his entire body of work, the misses didn't rate a crucifixion, but I didn't find the coverage unwarranted. Timing and context matter.
  7. Ah, memories. I once was umpiring a game at a field next to a golf course and had a lightning delay with no rain, which stayed north. Adult players from both teams were socializing in various ways on the field while I kinda nervously watched lightning flashing away every minute or so from the press box. I told everyone that by rule they had to be in the dugout during weather delays unless they were outside the fence. The league had this among the rules for umpires at site managers for administering weather delays: B. When lightning is observed or thunder is heard and the contest is suspended, contestants shall not return to the playing field until lightning has been absent from the local sky and thunder has not been heard for 30 minutes. There was a lot of grumbling and complaining as they all complied. About five minutes later a tree on the golf course down the left field line about 100 feet outside the fence exploded from a strike from a bolt of lightning. When we resumed an hour later, I didn't hear any complaints the rest of the game about my judgment.
  8. 2:56:15 mark will get you the whole story. Perry Costello, coincidentally from...Dewitt, MI He stays with the play to make sure F1 possesses it, calls the out, announces the no-foul, keeps the players apart, asks the B/R if he's OK, and explains why he's going to walk him off. He taught me many years ago at a clinic that in these volatile situations it's good to talk to them to diffuse it and it really doesn't matter a whole lot what you say. If you can get their focus on what you're saying, they aren't thinking (as much) about escalating trouble.
  9. That's precisely the point.
  10. That's what has happened, at least in college baseball. The defense is just initiating contact, trolling for a call they know they will get if there's so much as a touch. The call was correct, but the interference was by law only; that tiny contact didn't alter the play in the least. I like the call, but not the rule. It's easy to administer, but penalizes for things that don't cause any unfair advantage. Others disagree, and that's fine, but you're not alone.
  11. That has never been my experience; I see that happen all the time. It just doesn't get a lot of attention because neither side is looking for a call/no call.
  12. andydufresne

    Balk?

    Not saying I would have got it in real time, but it looks like he lifts and drops his heel before stepping off. The only good look is right at the start. Martin steals home
  13. How much longer will it take MLB to figure out that if they're going to add U5 and U6 to games they should put them on the fence, where their value added is considerably greater than on the foul lines 100' closer to the fence than U3 and U1? I'd put them in the alleys, but even at the foul poles would be a lot better than the way they waste them now.
  14. That's not my point. The umpire called it correctly. By rule, the runner interfered and has no defense. The rationale for the rule is both safety and interference. The runner didn't do anything to alter the play, and didn't do anything to endanger himself or the defensive player. Despite that, the result of proper enforcement of the rule is the offense was penalized an additional out and had a run taken off the board because the defense butchered the play. It's interference by fiat.To me, that's a bad rule. I get that not everybody agrees.
×
×
  • Create New...